Should schools have to allow prayer?

Allowing groups to pray in school, after hours when classes aren’t in session, is one of those issues that probably falls along ideological lines. Or does it? That’s the question for the day.

The issue is this: Religious groups, mainly those that don’t have a place of worship of their own, have been using New York City schools for services for some time now, and a state bill would allow the practice to continue.

As the New York Times explains, this issue didn’t just arise; it’s been going on for years. But bringing it to a head was a recent court decision that upheld a provision in state education law allowing schools to ban religious services on their premises.

A bill now in the state Legislature would allow prayer after school hours, although it doesn’t require that schools have no other school-related activity going on. What is says is that, “Nothing in this section shall authorize the trustees or board of education of the district to adopt or interpret regulations for the use of schoolhouses, grounds or other property…that would result in the exclusion or limitation of speech, during non-school hours, even where students may be present, including speech that expresses religious conduct or discusses subjects from a religious viewpoint.”

The Republican-controlled state Senate passed the bill on Monday, 55-7; the opponents were all Democrats. It now goes to the Assembly, where Democrats control the chamber.

Advocates of the bill — including hundreds of religious groups that use New York City schools, say it’s necessary particularly in poorer neighborhoods, where congregations don’t always money to support a stand-alone house of worship.

Opponents, though, say the practice at least gives the appearance of government endorsement of religion, in violation of the Constitution. They also warn that the law could have all sorts of unintended consequences by turning schools into forums for any kind of speech.

What do you think? Should taxpayer-funded buildings we available for worship?

Should schools be able to refuse to allow after-hours prayer services?

16 Responses

If you let one group in you have to allow all. You can not stop groups you don’t agree with. There are usually plenty of places to go and pray, churches are combining to share expenses. The public sites should remain neutural and be for all not anyone group.

Many schools charge for sports teams, Scout troops, dance classes, etc., to use the buildings after hours, even if it is just a nominal fee for heat, lights and cleaning. I don’t see why a religious group should be excluded. Why should these buildings only be used from 8-3 on weekdays? They were built at great expense to the taxpayers, we should rent out the space after hours.

The 1st Amendment to The Bill of Rights states; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF;”.
What that means is if a group of people want to use “their”, (as in they paid for it with “their” tax dollars), building as a place of worship then they have all the right to do just that. We have lost sight to the fact that the “government” does not have any right to anything…all rights rest with the people!!

If taxpayer-funded buildings, such as schools, have rooms that are available for public use during non-business hours for club meetings, hobbyists, scouts, support groups, and so on, then I see no reason to exclude religious groups from having equal access to meet and worship.

As long as religious groups abide by the same rules that apply to any other group and are not being disruptive, destructive, or actively recruiting then I see no reason to forbid them from praying.

The churches of our communities are a friend of our children. Through these churches, children are taught about the important issues of life and eternity. The mindset that exists that wants to separate these churches from these schools is ridiculously foolish and totally inconsistent with the first couple hundred years of education in this land.

Albany Resident above emphasizes the free exercise clause of the first amendment, but completely ignores the “establishment” clause that s/he quotes. It is the concern that allowing a church to establish as their permanent place of worship in a public school building, leads to the appearance that the state–through the public school building–is endorsing any one religion. When schools are overwhelmingly available on a Christian day of worship but not on days that other religions worship, this absolutely leads to an appearance that the schools endorse Christian religions. The separation of church and state serves religious freedom–we need to keep it that way. What folks don’t realize is that right now, Christianity is in favor in our country. The reason separation of church and state, and indeed the First Amendment’s TWO clauses concerning religion, are so important is because the tastes of the people change; one day we may find that Christianity is NOT a favored religion. If you erode the line between church and state, you risk that one day, the state may not look so kindly on your religion.

Providing free space for worship is obviously “respecting an establishment of religion.” Religion has no place in public buildings, especially schools. This in no way “prohibits the free exercise thereof.” It just means that if some religious group wants to worship they need to do in on the their own time and in their own space–not on public property.

This argument is silly. If a church, temple, or even a card-carrying cult wants to use public school spaces for their services after hours and is willing to pay the same cost any other group pays for reimbursement of utilities, etc. then why not let them? It could be evangelical Christians or Satanists. As long as they aren’t breaking any laws and there is no taxpayer money being used for their benefits, then there certainly is no victim and no first amendment violation.

“Albany resident” quotes the religion clauses of the First Amendment, but chooses to elevate the Free Exercise Clause over the Establishment Clause. So why is the Establishment Clause first?

Free Exercise keeps the government from prohibiting religion(s). It does NOT say that government should support religion(s) by providing meeting places. In fact, the Establishment Clause PROHIBITS government from supporting religion(s).

Government has a coercive method for raising funds for the common good, taxes. Most religions also have a coercive method for raising funds for their private purposes, “You’ll go to hell if you don’t give.”

Let religion(s)raise their own funds for their own buildings. Government should not, and indeed cannot, support religion(s).

As long as the religious groups cover the cost of using the school facilities just like any other group I have no Constitutional issue with their use. The school system would have to allow every group access without discrimination. So if you allow Christian groups you have to allow Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhists, etc., groups to utilize the same facilities. Also you would have to make it clear that the religious groups would not be allowed to proselytize to the children or use the school to claim a government endorsement of their specific church or belief system.

I am more concerned with prayer in the home. However, given the grim statistics we are faced with; divorce, incarceration, drop out rate maybe we should question our therapeutic cultures underpinnings in favor of supporting Christianity. Although, too much of Christianity has also become a societal liability that through the same corrupting influences of a psychological orientation: self indulgent self esteem, self love and acceptance, a mythological unconscious mind, the disease infested view of life and victimization to name just a few of their wonderful contributions to our undoing. How I envy the ill informed opinion that can rest its head on insanity.

Given time at which the constitution was written it reasonable think that the establishment clause was meant to preclude the establishment of a Church of England structure in this country. Given the behavior of teenagers in Albany anything that promotes more respectful behavior to others should be promoted, but then it is not your children who end up in prison and the ground but ours.

Religion is at best benign, but mostly it’s a force for destruction and evil masquerading as piety. Not one penny of my taxes should ever pay for any anything religious. Take “In God We Trust” OFF the currency. Remove “One Nation Under God” from the pledge of allegiance. Let us return to our pre-cold war mentality where logic and reason were valued. Let us remove all vestiges of the rancid religion from our public lives. Religion in my opinion, is a form of mental illness.

In this instance, the government isn’t providing space specifically for worship; it’s just providing space. A group can reserve an empty room during non-school hours to meet about whatever. Yes, allow the school to establish rules to ensure there are no disruptions to after school activities and that no one group monopolizes the meeting spaces. But to explicitly exclude a group because they would use a room to pray goes against equal access.

I’m very concerned about the “keep religions off public property” argument. Would you allow a group of people to reserve a pavilion in a taxpayer-funded public park to meet and pray? Or are they automatically denied access, even if they work and pay taxes?

If you must worship fairy tales and superstition why not find your own space to do so? Schools are places of higher learning which does not include talking snakes and two of all species being crammed onto a giant boat. Yes, Joe Roof, churches have done a great job of indoctrinating children into the wonderful world of mythology. My question for all of the Christians on here is how will you react when a radical Muslim sect opts to hold services in your local elementary school. And here is another idea, why don’t Catholic schools and other religious schools also offer their space to religious groups looking for space to worship. Does this joke of a bill also open up charter schools? Tax exemption, free space to worship, medicaid money supporting charities; religion has it pretty good in this country.